These
remarks are based on an examination of the large and valuable collection of the
Geological and Natural History Survey of Canada, Prof. John Macoun; the collections of Lafayette College,
Prof. T. C. Porter, and of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, Mr. J.
H. Redfield; contributions from Rev. R. E. Schuh, Minnesota; Mr. Chas. V.
Piper, Seattle, Washington; Dr. N. L. Britton, Dr. Sereno Watson, Mr. A. S.
Hitchcock, St. Louis, Mo., and Mr. O. A. Farwell, Mich., to all of whom I
tender my sincere acknowledgments.

To M.
Crépin, the distinguished rhodologist of Brussels, I am likewise under many
obligations, not only for rare specimens, illustrative of the species of the
Old World, by which I was enabled to compare allied forms of this country, but
also for making me acquainted with the results of his very extensive and
valuable observations. While the views herein expressed are believed to be
largely in accord with those entertained by him, the author, however, is solely
responsible for them.

The
group Cinnamomeae, enlarged so as to include the Gymnocarpae and the Alpinae,
is confessedly a difficult one with which to deal, Scarcely a species but
occupies more or less debateable ground. The geographical distributions are far
from being accurately known. In this respect the best that can often be done is
an approximation. Much time and patient labor are yet re­quired before
satisfactory results can be attained. These remarks are therefore to be
regarded as strictly preliminary.

The
importance of good material is so great that a few suggestions as to
collecting, it is hoped, will be pardonable. A small flowering or fruiting
branch makes a beautiful specimen, but for systematic study it is often quite
useless, in that it fails to furnish some of the more essential characters.
Specimens should be collected either in flower or in fully matured fruit—just
before the falling of the leaves; the latter is to be preferred. A few of the
younger, sterile growths of the season should be included. Since stoutness or
depauperateness modifies very markedly the characters, it is desirable to
collect from both. When possible, the whole bush should be pressed, dividing it
in sections if necessary. At all events, enough of the stem should be secured
to show the normal arrangement of the spines; this not infrequently varies in
different parts of the bush.

Few
plants are more strikingly modified by differences in environment than roses.
Even the younger growths appear quite different from the older, so much so
indeed as to cause them to be taken for different species. A knowledge,
therefore, of the value of characters is desirable. Quite contrary to what was
once thought, the varying degrees of pubescence, glaucousness, glandulosity,
and, to some extent, of prickles, possess little diagnostic value; and are to
be considered most frequently as accidents of growth depending on peculiarities
of soil and location for their development. Not that they are wholly devoid of
value, but are so only when taken in connection with characters of the first
order.

The
larger prickles, commonly but erroneously called spines, furnish important
indications, not so much by their shape and size, as by their arrangement on
the stem and branches. Valuable as this character is, there is no other that
taxes more the experience and judgment of the rhodologist. In rank bushes the
spines may be stout and curved; in depauperate slender and straight, yet belong
to the same species. They are frequently absent from bushes to which they
normally belong, and this from no known cause. The friction of high water often
removes them from such as grow on the banks of streams or low places subject to
inundations. It is not rare to find geminate spines grading to single ones on
flowering branches, thus appearing and in fact being alternate. On stems
normally devoid of spines, it is not uncommon to see two or more of the prickles
about the nodes somewhat enlarged. This condition leads to the error of taking
them for true geminate spines, which they are not. A little patient study,
however, usually suffices to clear up the difficulty in distinguishing the
normal type.

The
behaviour of the sepals during anthesis and the maturing of the fruit, likewise
furnish valuable indications, but not so much as do their adnation. They may be
persistent on the fruit when fully matured; they may be deciduous by a clear
circumcision at their base, or through the apex of the fruit. It is sometimes
difficult, not to say impossible, to distinguish the mode of adnation in
immature fruit. Sepals are either entire or lobed; when the outer are but
slightly lobed, it should be regarded as simply a passing variation from the
entire form.

Beyond
the mere fact that the styles may be free or connate, little of practical
importance has accrued from a very careful study of them. While quite variable,
the leaflets vary around a type which is quite constant in the same species. In
the more glandular forms, the toothing may be compound-glandular or serrulate,
while in those less resinous it may be nearly or quite simple. The stipules,
modified leaflets, are characters of varying import. In some groups and in some
species they possess diagnostic value; in others they have little significance.
It is by their general shape rather than by their width they merit attention.
In drying they may become involute, revolute or remain plane. Taking them all
in all, they do not possess the value usually allowed them.

The
petals, the habit of the bush, its in-ground ramifications, the shape, size and
color of the fruit, the number, shape and size of the seed, although usually of
secondary importance, yet frequently furnish valuable indications. The
insertion of the ovules, as recently pointed out by M. Crépin, is worthy of
more than a passing notice. This may be either strictly basil or
basilo-parietal. In the Cinnamomeae it is the latter; in the Carolinae it is
basil. It is needless to say that in roses as in other plants, it is more by
the tout ensemble than by any single character that a correct knowledge of its position
is to be attained.

CLASSIFICATION.
ROSA, Tourn.
GROUP CINNAMOMEAE,* CREPIN.

*Journal
of the Royal Hort. Soc. Part III. Vol. XI., Oct. 1889.

Styles free, included; insertion of the ovules
basilo-parietal; sepals usually erect and persistent on the matured fruit
inflorescence unifloral or multifloral, with a dilated bract on the primary
pedicels; spines straight or curved, geminate or alternate, usually mingled
with setaceous prickles, rarely unarmed; stem erect or ascending; stipules
adnate to the common petiole; leaflets 5 to 9 on flowering branches,

Sub-Group GYMNOCARPAE: sepals early deciduous with the
apex of the fruit; stems more or less prickly.

1. Rosa gymnocarpa,
Nuttall, 1840, ranges from British Columbia to California, and eastward to
Idaho and Montana. Its peculiar dehiscence, so far as is known, distinguishes
it from all other North American roses. Two Asiatic species, Rosa Alberti, Regel (1883), and Rosa
Beggeriana,
Schrenck (1841), are, as I am informed by M. Crépin, the only roses of this
sub-group in the Old World. To know the actual relations of these three closely
allied species would be extremely interesting.

2. Rosa blanda, Aiton
1789 (? R. Virginiana, Miller, 1768) ranges from Newfoundland westward through Quebec,
Ontario, New York, to Wisconsin and Illinois, where it passes into var. Arkansana. The stem of the type is either smooth or sparingly prickly the sepals, stipules
and leaflets rarely glandular. It is distinguished from the Carolina, by the
absence of geminate spines, by its erect, persistent sepals and by the
basilo-parietal insertion of its ovules.

3.Rosa
blanda, Ait.
var. Arkansana, (Porter). Although frequently observed before, it was first described
by Dr. Porter as Rosa Arkansana* from specimens collected on the banks of the Arkansas
River [Colorado] by Mr. Brandagee. The original specimen, in flower, is in the herbarium
of Lafayette College. Bush apparently low, I to 2 feet high; stem, foliage and
fruiting receptacles glaucous; flowers corymbose; sepals entire; bracts
lanceolate; leaflets 7 to 11, mostly 9, oblong-elliptical to oblanceolate,
somewhat cuneate at base; stipules rather broad; stem prickly.

The
stipules are as often broad as narrow; the outer sepals are rarely lobed,
probably not much more frequently than in R. blanda, from which it is
distinguished by its habit of growth, its glaucousness, by one or two pairs
more of leaflets, its prickly stem and by its being more or less glandular. It
would therefore appear that the characters relied upon to differentiate it from
the type lack specific distinctness.

Var. Arkansana ranges from
Texas and New Mexico northward to British America and westward to the Rockies
and probably beyond. It undergoes many modifications. On dry prairies it
becomes markedly surculose; its rhizomes are transformed into in-ground stems
which give off annual shoots like flowering branches. Since these rhizomes have
no leaves, the demand for more foliage is met by an extra pair of leaflets on
the suckers. In protected locations, as margins of woods and thickets, it
attains a height of from three to five feet, with stem either smooth or
prickly, and lives for years. It is sometimes found densely resinous. Like R.
blanda, rudimentary
glands on the sepals and stipules and under surfaces of the leaflets are rarely
absent. When its flowers are solitary, as sometimes happens, the low prickly
forms bear some resemblance to Rosa acicularis, from which it is readily
distinguished by its glaucous stem and foliage, leaflets more numerous and of
another shape.

4.Rosa
acicularis, Lindley, 1820, ranges through the northern portions of Europe, Asia and North
America. In the New World it extends from Alaska south to about 45 latitude;
from the Pacific eastward to Michigan and James Bay. Its synonyms appear to be R.
acicularis, var. Bourgeauiana, Crépin; R. Sayi, Schwein., a resinous form, and R. Engelmanni, S. Watson, a form with oblong
fruit.

After
having carefully examined several European and Asiatic specimens of this
species and a large number of American forms, including the original R. Sayi in the Phila. Academy, I
cannot find any character of recognized value to separate them. The forms of
the New World are usually somewhat more resinous but not constantly so, and the
fruit probably more inclined to be globose. These variations are far from being
uncommon in other species, as a result of differences in environment. To
multiply species therefore, because one specimen has a few more hairs or a few
less glands than another, or perchance fruit of a slightly differ cut shape,
seems uncalled for.

Rosa
acicularis is
from one to three feet high, more or less prickly, sometimes densely so; prickles
rarely enlarged about nodes simulating geminate spines; leaflets 3 to 7,
usually 5 to 7, broadly elliptical to oblong-lanceolate, mostly obtuse or
slightly cordate at base, flowers solitary; fruit sometimes globose but usually
more or less oblong.

5.Rosa
Nutkana, Presl, 1857, ranges from western Montana, Idaho, Oregon and Washington
northward and probably southward. In its densely resinous forms with stout
recurved spines and broad stipules, it is not easily confounded with any other
species. Forms, however, occur which are nearly or quite destitute of glands,
with straight, slender, sometimes ascending spines, frequently absent or
reduced to a single one in the upper part of the stem, leaflets larger and
simply toothed, and which are difficult to separate from unarmed forms of R.
acicularis. The fruit of R. Nutkana, large, coriaceous, thick-walled and fibrous, with seeds larger than in
any other species, serves to distinguish it.

6.Rosa
pisocarpa, Gray 1882 (? R. Woodsii, Lindley 1820). In "Primitiae" p. 432, M. Crépin describes R.
Fendleri from
a specimen collected in New Mexico. This description is based on a stunted
growth with straight slender spines, small leaflets and solitary flowers. He is
now, however, inclined to regard it as being practically the same as R.
pisocarpa, in
which opinion I fully concur; but Dr. Sereno Watson considers them quite
distinct. Limited space prevents me from entering into details I shall,
therefore, merely state my conclusions.

As in R. Nutkana, and in fact, as in all the Eucinnamomeae, the spines, which are normally more
or less curved, may become straight and slender and not infrequently ascending
in the upper part of the bush; so in R. pisocarpa.

To
divide specimens in two sections, one with straight or ascending spines, and
the other with stout recurved spines, would indicate little experience in
observing the variability of Roses. Moreover this treatment has been tried with R. Nutkana and wisely discontinued.

R.
pisocarpa, in
its varying forms is widely distributed, ranging from New Mexico to British
America, possibly as far north as Alaska (Crepin). It affects low wet
locations, attaining a height of 10 to 12 ft. in such, but is much reduced when
growing in drier, less fertile ground. Fruit is usually small, ordinarily
clustered, rarely solitary; seeds small, dull white; stipules short, usually
narrow; leaflets rather small, oblong-ovate to-obovate, usually simply toothed;
fascicles of adventitious branches are quite common in the upper part of the
bush, especially when reclining.

R.
Woodsii is
closely related to R. pisocarpa. In fact many of the specimens found in herbaria and
so labelled are of this species; others have a marked resemblance to R.
blanda, var. Arkansana. As before stated, an
occasional small lobe to the outer sepals has little diagnostic value. It may
be here remarked that when two or more species grow together, especially if on
the limits of each, intermediate forms are common, apparently due either to the
influence of a common environment or to hybridization, or to both combined.

7.Rosa
Californica, Cham. and Schlecht. 1827 is badly delimited. M. Crépin speaks of it as a
"chaos veritable." The material placed in my hands has been so
little, and that little so contradictory, that I have not reached any
satisfactory conclusions respecting it. I suspect, however, that one or two
good species will be found in the débris when it is thoroughly elaborated. It
is quite possible that variations of known species may figure largely in this
heterogeneous mass.

A
flowering specimen in the herbarium of Lafayette College, collected by Prof.
Rothrock at Santa Barbara, seems distinct, but whether it is Chamisso's Rose I
cannot tell. It is the terminal portion of a bush, probably 3 ft. high, with
stout recurved geminate spines (resembling those of R. Canina) without prickles; sepals
entire; flowers solitary or corymbose, on short, densely pubescent pedicels;
stipules pubescent, narrow, with diverging apices; fruiting receptacle ovate;
leaflets 5 to 7, elliptical to oblong-obovate, broadly obtuse or truncate at
the apex, tapering to the hase, glabrate above, villose-pubescent beneath;
serrations compound-glandular. This doubtless varies with spines nearly
straight, stem taller and prickly, and with leaves, stipules and pedicels with
varying degrees of pubescence and glandulosity.

8. Many roses take on a surculose habit, which would appear to be due to
unfavorable conditions of growth or to severe cold. As we have seen, var.
Arkansana is an example, as are also certain forms of R. humilis and R. foliolosa. R.
Californica likewise seems so disposed. In Bot. Calif. 2, 444, Dr. Watson describes R.
spithamaea. Subsequently,
however, he regards it as a "dwarf form of the resinous variety."*
Specimens of this, collected by Mr. Rattan along the Trinity River, and kindly
loaned me by Dr. Watson, seem to warrant his conclusion. It is most probably a
surculose form of some rose which grows stouter under more favorable
conditions.

The
same may be said of specimens collected by Prof. E. L. Greene in Petrified
Forest, Sonoma County, and which differ in several respects from those
collected by Mr. Rattan. It would seem probable that these are a surculose form
of a closely related yet distinctive species. The description here given is
based on specimens in fruit, furnished by Drs. Porter and Britton. Stem 6 to 10
inches high, with stout prickles and long straight or slightly recurved
geminate spines; leaflets 5, roundish-ovate, petiolulate, broad and markedly
inequilateral at base, crenate-serrate, toothing obtuse, apiculate and
serrulate; stipules short, broadest below the middle, apices diverging; flowers
many in flat-topped corymbs; sepals short, oblong-lanceolate, pointed, erect
and persistent on matured fruit; styles gradually enlarged upward, capitate;
pedi­cels short, glandular-pubescent, as also sepals and fruit; fruit small,
yellowish-brown, globose, densely clustered, hispid, pulp scanty, minutely
tuberculate seeds few, large, insertion basilo-parietal. This may be a good
species or a surculose form of a good species.